Squad conquest - early critiques

2»

Comments

  • waxena
    28 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I like this mode but it needs some tweaks.

    -Tanks are a little overpowered, in a normal map with 64 players, a lot more players attack a tank at the same time. In squad you only have 8 in a team, sometimes less because some players just idle when losing... So in best case scenario you got 2 medics, 2 assault, 2 reccon an 2 support. So 4 can get a tank out but that thank is constantly being used as a team spawn point and is in a tactical advantage. Because there is insufficient cover to reload and survive.

    -It Should be immpossible to get 3 teams in this game with only 8 players possible. There should be no room for lone wolfs playing a team game...
  • XxmOss72xX
    174 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Ran the the whole TOW series for the smg yesterday in about two hours on SCQ... My overall: :| meh... give me full CQ or grand ops
  • 0SiGHT0
    455 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 18
    buster518 wrote: »
    I find it really funny how the people who dont like it are mostly from conquest. Conquest is so casual and filled with casuals this one is the ranked equivalent definelty takes alot more skill to play and understanding when to push OBJs, when to place pressure on that third point so they dont push the other two or when to cut off the enemy in their push and understanding where they are coming from. Having some good games right from the start because I'm use to domination yall just arent and are so quick to hate it cause you arent used to playing a game mode that requires alot more personal skill that builds into the squads and how you all perform.

    Conquest small from the previous actual good BF games, I would argue, takes the most skill out of any of the pointless TDM or Dom game modes that DICE thinks people actually want to play on. This really comes out when it's a server of purely high quality players. Meanwhile, most of them just play on them because there are no vehicles and it's the only place left that doesn't have huge maps (they took everything else away).
  • JamieCurnock
    558 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I love it. My only issues are that there is a LOT of zerging going on which i find really boring. Constant running between flags just gets tiresome and often people are taken by surprise whilst at full speed running to the next flag. I know this seems to be the conquest way nowadays but I think squad conquest has the potential to be different.

    if it were 16 vs 16 you would get a lot less zerging and it would slow the play down a bit. People would be more inclined to defend points rather than sprinting off to the next one. The only issue is it might feel a bit cramped! Maybe 12 vs12 would be better?
  • Ernie_Shavers
    131 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I love it. My only issues are that there is a LOT of zerging going on which i find really boring. Constant running between flags just gets tiresome and often people are taken by surprise whilst at full speed running to the next flag.

    It get's old real fast. Rush would be a great alternative to the zerg style of conquest.
  • BL4CK_W4LL_
    704 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Bf5 needs atleast 1 competitive mode and this could be it.
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I wish they would have added the incursions mode from bf1 instead
  • Kattegat_Twin
    760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I didn't enjoy Squad Conquest very much at all, and I haven't played it once since Tides of War stopped forcing me to. Small maps is not Battlefield.
  • JamieCurnock
    558 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I love it. My only issues are that there is a LOT of zerging going on which i find really boring. Constant running between flags just gets tiresome and often people are taken by surprise whilst at full speed running to the next flag.

    It get's old real fast. Rush would be a great alternative to the zerg style of conquest.

    Yeah, I play breakthrough mainly so squad conquest is a nice alternative. I can't deal with main conquest as the zerging does my head in, having smaller teams in squad conquedt seems to lessen the zerging, although as I said it's still a problem.

    Looking forward to rush, can't wait to get back to where I started on battlefield. My concern is, will it just be the same as breakthrough but instead of capture points we get mcom stations?
  • IamSoSorry59
    161 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I like it alot also my shotgun likes it.
    wierd think is that I see sometimes that one party got more then 8 players .
  • Ernie_Shavers
    131 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I love it. My only issues are that there is a LOT of zerging going on which i find really boring. Constant running between flags just gets tiresome and often people are taken by surprise whilst at full speed running to the next flag.

    It get's old real fast. Rush would be a great alternative to the zerg style of conquest.

    Yeah, I play breakthrough mainly so squad conquest is a nice alternative. I can't deal with main conquest as the zerging does my head in, having smaller teams in squad conquedt seems to lessen the zerging, although as I said it's still a problem.

    Looking forward to rush, can't wait to get back to where I started on battlefield. My concern is, will it just be the same as breakthrough but instead of capture points we get mcom stations?

    It's been a while. Haven't played Rush since BF 3. Breakthrough map's are very open and the game doesn't flow well on most of the map's. Rush mode maps should present more cover and obviously have clearer objectives. There should be clear offensive and defensive strong point's throughout the path unlike the sloppy mess that is Breakthrough/Frontlines.
  • 0SiGHT0
    455 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    They need to put more effort into the flag design, maybe even redesign parts of the map when they presumably bring this game mode back more permanently. The capture zones for some of these flags are just a joke, they are far too small, barely any cover, etc. Bad Company 2 does flags extremely well, very few are poorly designed, they should look to that game for their guide. The distance between flags is pretty decent, as is the layout, it should be as close to conquest small as possible. Visibility is also huge on this game mode, and seeing as it is extremely poor it stands out here like a sore thumb.
Sign In or Register to comment.